The Jensen Huang scandal isn’t just a story about someone’s private life.
It’s a lever. And it’s going to be used for one thing: taking control of AI.
I’m not saying the facts are made up. Jensen admitted the affairs, and the investigation should run its course. I’m saying: look at what’s being built on top of it.
Look at the sequence.
Early November, Democrats win both chambers of Congress. Right after, they announce a flood of AI bills.
One congresswoman calls for a pause on advanced AI development and a ban on superintelligence, on day one. A bill introduced in the House would create a federal Department of AI with the power to decide which companies are allowed to build advanced models. A senator wants a federal AI Safety Board with mandatory standards. Others want mandatory testing before any model is released.
Translation: tomorrow, to release a model, you’ll need permission.
And who was standing in the way? Jensen.
He fought export restrictions he saw as counterproductive. He fought the state-by-state patchwork of AI laws. His very first post on X was a letter signed by Nvidia on a single topic: why open models matter. Safety, innovation, sovereignty. The world needs both closed models and open models.
Nvidia is one of the most powerful companies on the planet publicly defending open weights.
And now, in Washington, analysts are saying it out loud: the scandal has broken Nvidia’s ability to slow those bills down.
For those who want to lock everything up, the timing is perfect.
Why does this matter so much? Because open source is the only thing standing between AI and a tool of control.
If AI stays open, anyone can download a model, inspect it, modify it, run it on their own machine. A student in Lagos. A small business in Ohio. A dissident in Hong Kong. No one can switch it off. No one can decide for them what the machine is allowed to say.
Kill open source, and what’s left?
A handful of closed models. Licensed. Tested, approved, monitored by a federal agency. And when an agency decides what an AI is allowed to say, it decides what billions of people will read, learn and think.
That’s not a technology anymore. That’s a Ministry of Truth with an API.
And don’t believe for a second these rules will hurt the giants.
George Stigler, Nobel laureate in economics, showed it: regulation almost always ends up captured by the very players it claims to rein in. A multimillion-dollar license? The giants pay it without blinking. A ten-person open source lab can’t. Bureaucrats write the rules, the biggest players write them alongside them, and everyone else disappears.
A caste of bureaucrats, backed by a few billionaires rich enough to buy their ticket in. That’s what the closed world looks like.
Europe already went down this road. The result: models launch in the US and China, and reach Europe months later. If they reach it at all.
And while America gets ready to handcuff itself, China is shipping open-weight models one after another and giving them to the whole world.
If AI stays open, it belongs to everyone.
If it closes, it belongs to whoever hands out the licenses.
And that day, it’s game over.
I copied that from some French newspaper, there’s no ai used (at least by me)